Why not become a lifetime supporting member of the site with a one-time donation of any amount? Your donation entitles you to a ton of additional benefits, including access to exclusive discounts and downloads, the ability to enter monthly free software drawings, and a single non-expiring license key for all of our programs.

You must sign up here before you can post and access some areas of the site. Registration is totally free and confidential.

Well this one runs.But it isn't any different - except there is extra text on the about page - but it wraps after the second - and 3/4 of the second line gets clipped off.

It is still appearing off screen, and still shows scaled coordinates to window spy. If I move it so the right edge is adjacent to the taskbar then with the mouse at the right edge of T-Clock's window the x screen position is about 1400 but when i move it right is suddenly jumps to over 2000.

Well this one runs.But it isn't any different - except there is extra text on the about page - but it wraps after the second - and 3/4 of the second line gets clipped off.

Yeah, oops ... The test machine (looked fine, but) was at some weird res/DPI setting so I gotta redo that part - It was a bit of an (after thought) rush job.

Quote

It is still appearing off screen, and still shows scaled coordinates to window spy. If I move it so the right edge is adjacent to the taskbar then with the mouse at the right edge of T-Clock's window the x screen position is about 1400 but when i move it right is suddenly jumps to over 2000.

Man, I've tried everything I can think of trying to duplicate this to aviod picking on your hardware. But, I think we may need to explore that possibility. I had hoped that someone else with that type of setup would chime in to confirm or disprove the behavior ... but it seems it just the two of us stuck head-2-head. I'm debating on adding a (work arround) option to save last dialog position as a last resort.

Everything I try makes it worse, and the more I research this everything points at the origional code as being correct.

It is still appearing off screen, and still shows scaled coordinates to window spy. If I move it so the right edge is adjacent to the taskbar then with the mouse at the right edge of T-Clock's window the x screen position is about 1400 but when i move it right is suddenly jumps to over 2000.

Man, I've tried everything I can think of trying to duplicate this to aviod picking on your hardware. But, I think we may need to explore that possibility. I had hoped that someone else with that type of setup would chime in to confirm or disprove the behavior ... but it seems it just the two of us stuck head-2-head. I'm debating on adding a (work arround) option to save last dialog position as a last resort.

Everything I try makes it worse, and the more I research this everything points at the origional code as being correct.

*Shrug* I'm stumped...

I think I have found what's wrong with the x64 version.The two versions (x64, and x86) have different manifests. The x86 has both the sections that are in the x64 clock.exe but in the opposite order, and also has a third section that includes the dpiAwareness setting. So it looks like the x64 version isn't set as DPI aware.

As an experiment I added the DPI aware to the x64 version's manifest.It now appears in the right place <added> and the calender appears on screen </added>.But it isn't scaling correctly internally.

I have attached before and after images for the about, mouse, and quicky tabs - the others appear normal.In the mouse tab the list of actions starts too soon so overlaps the controls for setting the actions.In the quicky tab the list doesn't fill the remainder of the page.The font in the tabs is smaller - so more fit on one line.The label with the build information fits better but still wraps onto a second line and gets clipped.

The internal scaling issue I've seen before, I hadn't addressed it yet because you'd never mentioned it - which has been bugging me (I eluded to it a few pages back) - and I/we/one of us had to get the positioning issue nailed down first. Thanks for finding it.

All of the ListView controls are added/created at runtime so I'll just need to add a routine to size & position them based on current conditions after creation.

I have an alternate idea to the Auto rename feature. I originally suggested:

----------

Quote

3 Auto Rename file for file drag and drop?

This might be possible now but it's beyond my knowledge of how one would set this up.

The idea here would be to rename a dropped file to have a predefined user date/time string appended as a prefix or suffix before the file extension.This might be the same as the single click option for example or perhaps yet another string specifically for this purpose.For example: Original file name: Draft_ideas.doc Suffix Drag drop results in: Draft_ideas_2010-07-02_02hrs_07mins.doc Prefix Drag drop results in: 2010-07-02_Draft_ideas.doc----------

Rather than try and deal with drag and drop to do the rename, which I don't know if it is even possible, instead, add the capability to do the remname as a right click menu item when you selct the file. For example, right click on a file in the windows explorer and the option to tclock-rename with prefix and tclock-rename with suffix is offered.

Drag and drop functionality is already built into T-Clock so I'm willing to explore the file rename option there. Adding something to the context menu would force me to have a method of removing it (read uninstall procedure) other than just deleting the clock's folder. So I'll leave that to one of the myriad of other apps out there more oriented toward file management.

@sagji - I know I still owe you a clean (no borked manifest) build, but I've been wrestling with how best to do what with which compiler (VS2005 vs. VS2010). I just don't like VS2010 ... So I've got to run a few test on some of the other (office/work) projects to see if I can decide if the switch is worth it.

Speaking of work/office projects, I've gotten tied up in a large in-house deployment that has had (and will continue to have) me tied up to the point that I'm to fried when I get home to work on T-Clock. Hopefully it will calm down a bit in a month or so and allow me to take another run at the project. I'm just spread a bit to thin these days so I had to drop something before I either screw it up or burn myself out (Which is getting annoyingly easy at my age).

Yes, it's one of the items I still need to tweak a bit. It was added during the high DPI tests and I never checked it at the normal (default) settings - which apparently I should have. It will be fixed before the next build is released.

thanks for pointing me to this thread via email.I just installed TClock 2010 on my Win7x64 and it works perfectly (even the secret hidden it-which-must-not-be-named feature).

Just one thing, compared to your TClock x64 1.01 which I used up to today:when I use the same font settings for the Clock text the new text is way to bold even when bold is not selected (when it is, it goes ultra-creamy-bold).

This is what v1.0.1 displays with Verdana, 9pt, not bold:

And this is the same setting with v2010:Actually it looks like ClearType was enabled but it's not. Is there a way to make the text brilliant sharp like it used to be (please )?

Just one thing, compared to your TClock x64 1.01 which I used up to today:when I use the same font settings for the Clock text the new text is way to bold even when bold is not selected (when it is, it goes ultra-creamy-bold).

This is what v1.0.1 displays with Verdana, 9pt, not bold:

And this is the same setting with v2010:Actually it looks like ClearType was enabled but it's not. Is there a way to make the text brilliant sharp like it used to be (please )?

Well... Here's where I'm at (surprised nobody caught this before). I made a change in the way T-Clock creates its-own font at runtime that effectively creates a ClearType font (I was/am debating on making this a configurable option). The native Taskbar transparency is whats queering the deal here, because if you have a dark background the fonts look fine. White or pale backgrounds make the font appear to fuzz.

As an example of this behavior:

Notice it's crystal clear over the command prompt, but it gets fuzzy over the white?

I'm guessing from your screen-shots that you have a light-ish colored wallpaper, Yes?

If you can replicate the test, and confirm this behavior, I'll add including a toggle to the To-Do list so T-Clock's use of ClearType can be disabled internally. *Shrug* ...It seemed like the thing to do at the time - I was shooting for crisper fonts on a dark background - But I have been wrong before...

P.S. (Almost forgot) From your screen-shots, it looks like you need to increase the clock height setting a bit (+2 should do) so it stops cutting off the bottom of the g's

Here's a commandline tool to sync clock with internet time, linked from http://shellcity.net -- maybe you could just add a menu item to invoke it.

Quote

Cmdtime 3 is easy-to-use command-line utility which adjusts computer's date and time via Internet Time Servers. It's recommended to use it either standalone, or in batch-files, or with external shedulers.

In previous versions the T-clock Timers had an option to display the remaining time of a timer next to the clock. The latest (beta8) x64 version has the timer watch window but a window has to be opened a first and this information isn't always visible.

Would it be possible to display the remaining time so that it's always visible? Like beneath the clock or as a transparent layer somewhere on the screen?

I honestly don't recall ever seeing that option...but I like it. It's possible it appeared in a different code branch than the one I'm on...(I don't know)...I'd hate to think after all this time I managed to miss something like that ... But stranger things have happened.

The functionality certainly was not intentionally removed. If you can let me know which build/version/authors work you saw this in I'll see what I can do about getting it in (or back in) to T-Clock's feature set.

Development has been stalled for a bit as office projects have had me pinned down but I hope to get it back on-track soon.

Been following your progress on this thread, Stoic. I have to say it: I'm awed by you C++ gurus. I'm just now finally starting to understand events and delegates in C#. Tried delving into C++ a couple years ago, but was quickly overwhelmed and ran whimpering back into my C# Cave

Okay, so after a bit of a sabbatical I finally worked up the nerve today to do the compiler downgrade swap to MSVS2008. 2010 just flat irked me, and it killed support for Windows 2000 ... Which IMO is a deal breaker.

The newly posted beta 8.5 (build 85) is identical to the previous build except for the return of Win2k support, fixing the About Tab's text wrapping issue, and the build number. Which granted is a bit dumb, but the Win2k support thing was really bugging me.

It appears I have 2 weeks to finish this thing before I have to change the name ... Feel free to place bets on the outcome.

@kyrathaba - Thank you, but to be honest, I'm far from a guru. There's a lot of guess work, a lot of Google, and a lot of thinks that go very badly. Tenacity and a sense of humor are my two primary "tools".

I never really got the hang of reversing, so you're way ahead of me there. I do recall you mentioning that once before, but the how I'm unclear on. Can you be a bit more specific on the mucking around part?